Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Will President Bush select a pro-"choice" judicial nominee? Gonzales on short list? (scarry)

Posted on 06/19/2005 8:37:21 AM PDT by Sun

I just heard on WABC radio news that the candidates that President Bush is considering as U.S. Supreme Court nominees are John Roberts, J. Michael Luttig and possibly Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales.

Alberto Gonzeles is not pro-life, which worries me.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: abortion; albertogonzales; anotheruselessvanity; chooselife; dontbelieveit; drinkingkoolaid; judicialnominees; notbreaking; uselessvanity; ussupremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last
Now is the time for pro-lifers to call the White House comment line (202-456-1111), send faxes (202-456-2461) and send e-mails (president@whitehouse.gov), asking the president to pick a STRONG pro-life judicial nominee. We could also write letters to editors to religioius and secular newspapers, asking others to do the same.

Calling pro-life, conservative talk shows would help, as well.

1 posted on 06/19/2005 8:37:21 AM PDT by Sun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sun
"Information" comes from a wash compsot article.

Pure spin and irrelevancy.

2 posted on 06/19/2005 8:40:31 AM PDT by Dane ( anyone who believes hillary would do something to stop illegal immigration is believing gibberish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun
heard on WABC radio news

Was their source a European re-typed memo? or was it from Abilene?

3 posted on 06/19/2005 8:41:41 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (I'm sick and tired of being sicked and tired!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane

how do we know Gonzales is not pro-life? How do you know Rhenquist is?

Actual0yl it doesnt matter what his personal views are.

I would prefer a pro-abortion justice that follows the law and overturns ROE.


4 posted on 06/19/2005 8:41:51 AM PDT by atlanta67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sun

Conidering all the Radicals appointed to the SCOTUS by Bush I, Reagan, Nixon and Eisenhower, it stands to reason Bush II will continue the tradition.


5 posted on 06/19/2005 8:42:02 AM PDT by Guillermo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

You are basing your opinion on a decision he made based on the law. I do not have a clue if he is pro choice or pro life.


6 posted on 06/19/2005 8:42:42 AM PDT by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

The info came straight from Lucy Ramirez


7 posted on 06/19/2005 8:43:01 AM PDT by Republican Red (DU: ''Reality sucks. That's the problem. We want another reality.'')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: atlanta67

Sadly, Judges no longer consider the actual law and simply issue opinions.

Now, they consult their own personal opinions and issue orders.


8 posted on 06/19/2005 8:43:27 AM PDT by Guillermo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sun

I agree with you and everything, but we will have Civil War II before liberals will give up their "right" to kill unborn children. It's what they live for.


9 posted on 06/19/2005 8:43:38 AM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

Breaking News?


10 posted on 06/19/2005 8:46:53 AM PDT by MJY1288 ("Dingy" Harry Reid & "Disturbed" Durbin are a Waste of Tax Payers Money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

The only sure thing about who is selected to fill any vacancy on the court is the fact that he/she will continue the tradition of maximizing the damage to America.


11 posted on 06/19/2005 8:46:58 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

My personal choice would be Janice Rogers Brown for SCOTUS and even chief SCOTUS:

Private property, already an endangered species in California, is now entirely extinct in San Francisco.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown

Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown

We no longer find slavery abhorrent. We embrace it. We demand more. Big government is not just the opiate of the masses. It is the opiate. The drug of choice for multinational corporations and single moms; for regulated industries and rugged Midwestern farmers and militant senior citizens.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown

The quixotic desire to do good, be universally fair and make everybody happy is understandable. Indeed, the majority's zeal is more than a little endearing. There is only one problem with this approach. We are a court.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown

Government is the only enterprise in the world which expands in size when its failures increase.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown

The public school system is already so beleaguered by bureaucracy; so cowed by the demands of due process; so overwhelmed with faddish curricula that its educational purpose is almost an afterthought.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown


12 posted on 06/19/2005 8:47:37 AM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/canadahealthcare.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past

" agree with you and everything, but we will have Civil War II before liberals will give up their "right" to kill unborn children. It's what they live for."

If the pro-aborts fight harder for death, than the good guys do for life, death will win and continue to win.

Please contact the White House.


13 posted on 06/19/2005 8:48:54 AM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288

"Breaking News?"

I just heard it and was surprised that President Bush would even consider Gonzales. Why did we fight so hard to get Bush reelected?


14 posted on 06/19/2005 8:50:45 AM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sun

As the Specter endorsement indicated, pro-politics trumps pro-life. However we can hope that, at the moment-of-truth, President Bush will choose a confirmed pro-lifer.


15 posted on 06/19/2005 8:51:03 AM PDT by ex-snook (Protectionism is Patriotism in both war and trade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

I know I know. You're right. I'm just saying that the left worships abortion and they won't give it up for anything. I'll still fight for the unborn's right-to-life until the day I day, but I recognize the zealotry of the other side. They love abortion.


16 posted on 06/19/2005 8:51:51 AM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

"My personal choice would be Janice Rogers Brown for SCOTUS and even chief SCOTUS:"

She would be my personal choice, as well, and thanks for giving us even more reasons why she is a great choice.

We could suggest her name to the president, and frankly, I was shocked that she wasn't one of the names mentioned.


17 posted on 06/19/2005 8:55:24 AM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: All; atlanta67; Dane

Here's an excerpt of an article that I found about Gonzales:

To view this excerpt online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41386

Wednesday, November 10, 2004
CHANGING OF THE GUARD
Pro-lifers not thrilled
with Gonzales choice

Bush's pick for attorney general upheld abortion on Texas court
Pro-life activists are criticizing President Bush's choice of Alberto Gonzales to replace John Ashcroft as attorney general, worrying the White House counsel will not aggressively uphold the administration's anti-abortion stance.

Gonzales is a former member of the Texas Supreme Court, where he voted to allow a teenager to get an abortion without notifying her parents, circumventing the notification law in that state. At the time he criticized the position taken by his colleague on the court, Priscilla Owen, who voted against allowing the abortion. Gonzales said dissenting from his majority opinion "would be an unconscionable act of judicial activism."
His comments later were used by Democrats in the U.S. Senate who blocked Owen's confirmation to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Chuck Baldwin, a pastor and columnist, slammed Gonzales, citing the Texas case and stating, "Gonzales is anything but pro-life." (excerpt)


18 posted on 06/19/2005 9:00:36 AM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sun

I am concerned about his upholding ROE, not whether he is pro-life or pro-choice.

Dont you think many personally pro-life judges have voted to uphold abortion laws becasue they were tied by ROE.

Again what make you think Rhenquist is pro-life? Maybe he is pro-choice but understands the role of the judiciary.


19 posted on 06/19/2005 9:03:35 AM PDT by atlanta67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: floriduh voter; Lesforlife; Dante3; Diva Betsy Ross; TAdams8591; russesjunjee; 8mmMauser

Ping


20 posted on 06/19/2005 9:05:27 AM PDT by amdgmary (Please visit www.blogsforterri.com and www.theempirejournal.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past

"...They love abortion...."


Got that right!! And unfortunately, with this country divided as evenly as it is right now, IMO there is NO WAY Roe will be overturned, NO WAY...

My dad died a few years ago from cancer and I can remember one of the things he said about his disease... He said there was no doubt that there is a cure for cancer out there already, no doubt at all. But, there is SO MUCH financial liability equated to it in this country, that the news of a cure would need to come out of the Far East or someplace like that. There is too much at stake...

I think the same rings true in overturning Roe v. Wade, it may not be as much a financial liability as the other, but I think the overturning would create extreme consequence. Now, before anyone jumps ugly with me.... I'm 100% on the side of I don't care, extreme consequence or not, I want it overturned. I just don't think it ever will be regardless of who is on the SCOTUS...


21 posted on 06/19/2005 9:22:30 AM PDT by Hand em their arse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: atlanta67

I feel that pro-lifers have integrity and are basically honest, and will abide by the original Constitution. Of course, and sadly, it won't happen overnight.


22 posted on 06/19/2005 9:35:21 AM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: amdgmary

Gonzales is against torture unless it was Terri Schiavo. Alberto Gonzalez cannot be trusted imo.


23 posted on 06/19/2005 11:17:42 AM PDT by floriduh voter (www.terrisfight.org & www.conservative-spirit.org... The Schindlers "Never again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: atlanta67

Gonzales is not pro-life.


24 posted on 06/19/2005 11:18:22 AM PDT by floriduh voter (www.terrisfight.org & www.conservative-spirit.org... The Schindlers "Never again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sun

IMHO

bush will nominate only judges that can be CONTROLLED.

Pro-Life, Pro-Abortion, Pro-NWO, - it doesn't matter.

It's about power.

and control


25 posted on 06/19/2005 11:21:16 AM PDT by WhiteGuy ("a taxpayer dollar must be spent wisely, or not at all" - GW BUSH </sarcasm>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: floriduh voter

it doesnt matter, what does he think or ROE.

Do you know for a fact Rhenquist is pro-life?


26 posted on 06/19/2005 11:48:18 AM PDT by atlanta67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Sun; 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...


27 posted on 06/19/2005 12:14:11 PM PDT by Coleus ("Woe unto him that call evil good and good evil"-- Isiah 5:20-21)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hand em their arse
"He said there was no doubt that there is a cure for cancer out there already, no doubt at all. But, there is SO MUCH financial liability equated to it in this country, that the news of a cure would need to come out of the Far East or someplace like that. There is too much at stake..."

I agree completely and in fact had this conversation earlier today. A "cure" would ruin the livlihoods of too many people.

The same is true about the abortion industry, even on the pro-life side.

28 posted on 06/19/2005 1:23:49 PM PDT by TAdams8591 (Off the cuff comments are NOT CLEAR and CONVINCING evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Coleus,Bump.


29 posted on 06/19/2005 2:57:51 PM PDT by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Wow! those quotes are great! thanks for posting them. I didn't realize she was such a solid intellectual. I had suggested her for the scotus because it would make the Dems insane: how can they possibly oppose a black woman for the Court after they just voted her fit for the Court of Appeals? She's better than I thought.


30 posted on 06/19/2005 3:57:18 PM PDT by JewishRighter (Shoot 'em in the whites of their eyes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JewishRighter

I would want her for SCOTUS and chief SCOTUS if she were a white man.

The fact that she is a black women will, of course, cause coniptions on the left, an added bonus, but not any reason for Conservatives/Libertarians, who (supposedly) operate on the prinicples of equality and ability, to choose her over any other.

This, I think, is exactly how she would see it too.

The Washington Post called her a 'right wing' judicial activist in an editorial.

Good. It's about time.


31 posted on 06/19/2005 4:26:32 PM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/canadahealthcare.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Sun
You got this from whom, the ratmedia? And the President called the ratmedia in and said "Ok listen up, I'm going to tell YOU my good friends in the media my possible picks for the court. I've decided to bypass conservatives."
BTW you forgot to mention the hottest rumored name: Lawrence Tribe.
32 posted on 06/19/2005 4:30:45 PM PDT by jmaroneps37 (Dealing with liberals? Remember: when you wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty and he loves it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

We need to run Janice Rogers Brown for President. Those quotations read as if they had been uttered by Ronald Reagan.


33 posted on 06/19/2005 4:33:48 PM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Guillermo

---Con[s]idering all the Radicals appointed to the SCOTUS by Bush I, Reagan, Nixon and Eisenhower, it stands to reason Bush II will continue the tradition.---

I sadly but wholeheartedly concur. As in the original comments by Deep Throat to Woodward and Bernstein, if you want to understand this, "Follow the money." The abortion industry rakes in millions, is largely unregulated (one needs more permission to have a tonsil removed than a child exterminated), and we don't know what is done with the "byproducts of the process."

One day, a bright tort lawyer is going to make a ton of money suing those who offer this procedure in a mammoth class action suit.


Frank


34 posted on 06/19/2005 4:35:03 PM PDT by Frank Sheed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

She won't be confirmed without the nuke option, but she would be the best choice because there is not much out there.


35 posted on 06/19/2005 4:41:12 PM PDT by photodawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

And the Senate actually confirmed her with a majority (more than 60) (albeit after four years of heated debate). Yep, she's the one.


36 posted on 06/19/2005 4:42:04 PM PDT by dufekin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Sun

Chuck Baldwin, a pastor and columnist, slammed Gonzales, citing the Texas case and stating, "Gonzales is anything but pro-life." (excerpt)



You really have a legit source in Baldwin.... Didn't he run on the Constitution Party ticket as the VP Candidate with Pertouka the guy that turned his two step childern over to the state of Maryland?

A more important question is have you read the opinion in the case you cite and follow the logic of the decision that was made. Plus what he said regarding judicial activism. Until you do please don't fall for everything that is said about it.


37 posted on 06/19/2005 4:44:41 PM PDT by deport (Save a horse...... ride a cowgirl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: All; jmaroneps37

In any event, Rehnquist will most likely resign at the end of this month, so it won't hurt to contact the president, and tell him to select a STRONG pro-life U.S. Supreme Court nominee.

This is our chance to EVENTUALLY overturn Roe.


38 posted on 06/19/2005 5:34:52 PM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: deport

Please do a search about Gonzales, and you will see what I mean.


39 posted on 06/19/2005 5:37:08 PM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Sun

Please do a search about Gonzales, and you will see what I mean.



Why....... and see what people like Baldwin has to alledge. You want even read the opinion and the reasoning behind the decision. Your mind is made up without even looking at the actual document....


40 posted on 06/19/2005 6:42:49 PM PDT by deport (Save a horse...... ride a cowgirl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: deport

Enlighten me.


41 posted on 06/19/2005 7:20:51 PM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Sun

Enlighten me.



Your google suddenly broken?.... I thought it was the enlightment tool.


42 posted on 06/19/2005 7:33:11 PM PDT by deport (Save a horse...... ride a cowgirl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: deport

I couldn't find it.


43 posted on 06/19/2005 7:38:20 PM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Sun
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/texasstatecases/sc/000224o.htm

It isn't a long read but does take some attention and rereads or at least it did for me. Legalese isn't my forte.
44 posted on 06/19/2005 8:06:43 PM PDT by deport (Save a horse...... ride a cowgirl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: deport

Thank you. I'll read it tomorrow as I have to get up at 4 a.m.


45 posted on 06/19/2005 8:57:57 PM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Sun

Thank you. I'll read it tomorrow as I have to get up at 4 a.m.



Get the rest..... 4 a.m. isn't that far away.


46 posted on 06/19/2005 9:10:40 PM PDT by deport (Save a horse...... ride a cowgirl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: All

Good morning, early morning blurry-eyed bump.


47 posted on 06/20/2005 1:33:42 AM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: All

This is being discussed in the News forum: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1425923/posts


48 posted on 06/20/2005 8:56:46 AM PDT by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sun

Short version: Gonzales is on certain pro-lifers' s**t list because he applied the Texas parental consent law as written, not as those particular pro-lifers wished it had been written.


49 posted on 06/20/2005 9:01:28 AM PDT by BeHoldAPaleHorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse; deport

If interested, please see post #44. Here's an excerpt from the link:

"F. Respecting the Rule of Law

The United States Supreme Court has observed that abortion is a divisive and highly-charged issue. See Casey, 505 U.S. at 866, 869. Thus, we recognize that judges' personal views may inspire inflammatory and irresponsible rhetoric. Nevertheless, the issue's highly-charged nature does not excuse judges who impose their own personal convictions into what must be a strictly legal inquiry. We might personally prefer, as citizens and parents, that a minor honor her parents' right to be involved in such a profound decision. But the Legislature has said that Doe may consent to an abortion without notifying her parents if she demonstrates that she is mature and sufficiently well informed. As judges, we cannot ignore the statute or the record before us. Whatever our personal feelings may be, we must "respect the rule of law." Casey, 505 U.S. at 868."

I don't like the fact that the COURTS decide if a minor is mature, or not anyway, and more so, when it results in the death of an innocent pre-born baby, as I am pro-life.

It seems as if "Big Brother" is raising America's children more and more.


50 posted on 06/20/2005 2:33:13 PM PDT by Sun (Call the U.S. SELL-OUT senators toll-free, 1-877-762-8762 & give 'em "heck.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson